Believe us, by this point we're all feeling a little weary of all the mega-intense
iPhone news/drama/speculation that's been going around these past few days, but we couldn't help but remark on John Markoff's comment in the New York Times yesterday that Apple could possibly add 3G to the iPhone via a software update. It's not unheard of for a firmware upgrade to unlock new features or functionality in a device, but the sources we've spoken to have made it pretty clear that Apple hasn't wedged a UMTS or HSDPA radio into this thing. Not that we wouldn't mind this being true. We're pretty bummed that the iPhone doesn't have HSDPA -- once you taste 3G, it's hard to go back to anything slower -- but it's semi-understandable that they'd want to use an EDGE radio that'd cost less and be less power hungry. Or at least that seems to be the prevailing theory, Jobsy hasn't exactly come out and said why a high-end handset that's due out in mid-2007 will be a generation behind in its wireless connectivity.
[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
posted January 12th 2007 4:09AM
There are an awful lot of people that need to think before they start typing. While doing that thinking ask the right questions too.
"Is Apple retarded?" is not the question you should be asking yourself.
"Why would Apple do this?" is a better one. You're foolish if you think it's production price, 3G chips are ~$5 a pop, and I imagine EDGE is not much cheaper. As per Apple's usual I expect them to turn a nice margin on this product, and it certainly would not have been at stake but for the addition of a 3G chip. REAL MATH: If 1% fewer people buy an iPhone, because there is no 3G, it's a negative DOLLARS decision, and I don't think Apple would miss that.
As was said, UMTS chips are backwards compatible leaving open the POSSIBILITY that it is a UMTS chip. If that's the case why? FCC clearance could have something to do with it. Steve does not want to see this thing held up, and if he said June it means he's already pushed the go button on manufacturing. If the FCC has a problem with his 3G no biggie it was never there from the start. If not then he's got 'one more thing' to grab hold of you naysayers.
The other possibility I see is he didn't feel like talking to everyone in the industry to get this thing done. Maybe Apple didn't like any of the 3G controllers from their 'trusted' partners. Maybe he didn't want SE or Nokia to know he was going to have something with a 3G radio in it sometime soon.
At any rate the answer to this question is there was a strong business reason. It may even tie into part 2.
Why no user installable apps? If you have 3rd party installable OS X apps, how is it that you can prevent someone from installing a full fledged iTunes? If someone can install iTunes, and has complete internet access, how do you stop them from downloading a song from iTunes? You don't. And then how do you explain to Cingular why their entire west coast media downloading business just disappeared? I think Steve's answer was a lot more correct than most of you give him credit for. Cingular is far more concerned about revenues collapsing than they are about their network, and I'd bet Steve knows that as well as anyone. Network outages go untouched for weeks depending on the area, with CSRs just saying, "Sorry, we'll get to it ASAP."
This is, as best I can think, the very first time a relationship like this has existed. There are two very large corporate bodies trying to work symbiotically, but corporations are like virii, the more powerful they are the more toxic they are to everything. There has got to be a lot of back room whispers amongst the execs at both companies, each trying to get the upper hand in this thing, because that's just the way BoDs look at this stuff.
What would those sound like?
Apple: Let's keep 3G off this so the medianet experience is horrible, and everyone uses iTunes and syncs.
Cingular: Let's not announce our data rate, so if it turns out Apple screws us and our revenues die, we can just require a $60/month data package and kill this phone dead where it stands, for the next couple years we have gauranteed by contract.
Both these companies have their pants down right now, and like most men not wearing pants, believe that they are trying to protect their ass.
"There are an awful lot of people that need to think before they start typing." You could replace "think" with "assume" in this sentence, too.
UMTS chips cost US$25-35 each. A GSM/EDGE chip costs less than $5. Equipping 10 million iPhones with a UMTS chip would result in an additional cost to Apple of $300 million. If 1% of these 10 million declined to buy the phone due to lack of UMTS, that's $60 million MAX in opportunity cost to Apple. Losing $300 million vs. losing $60 million. Gee. Wonder which one Steve'd choose.
The open UMTS chipset market (i.e., the market excluding the chips produced under contract for Nokia and Ericsson by TI and Infineon) is ruled by Qualcomm. Qualcomm's UMTS chips are NOT EDGE-capable. The logic is thus: If the iPhone has a UMTS chip, it's probably a Qualcomm chip. If it's a Qualcomm chip, the phone couldn't even do EDGE in the first place. In all likelihood, this phone does not have a UMTS chip in it.
I am puzzled as to the nature of the FCC tie-in here. In the USA - unlike Europe - cellular carriers can do anything they want with their radio spectrum, as long as they comply with radiated power and spurious emissions requirements set by the FCC. If carriers want to utilise UMTS, so be it. And when Apple buys a phone platform from a third party, it's already compliant with FCC emissions requirements. There is no FCC concern here.
I haven't seen anything written saying that there will be no associated data usage charge with the iPhone. If iPhone users pay the same rates for data as every other Cingular user, why would Cingular care if iTunes were accessed directly from the iPhone? The "no 3rd party apps" justification is, indeed, that US carriers are hyper-paranoid that a 3rd party application could screw up their network. This is not just Cingular's position on the issue, but all carriers' view. Why isn't 3G taking off world-wide? In addition to cost, it's because people aren't being allowed to do what they want with their phones in terms of applications. This isn't going to change any time soon, at least not in the USA, and at least not until WiMAX is in play. The ridiculous thing is that, if a phone app doesn't have access to the phone's radio hardware, it can do no more harm to a network than a cellular PC Card-equipped PC. Regardless, this is a short-term issue. This phone will be hacked just like the iPod was hacked. It's just a matter of time.
I heard from a Cingular employee that one other problem with shipping the phone with 3G is that the visual voicemail system doesn't work on 3G yet. While this may imply that the device could ship with a firmware disabled 3G radio, the implication from this Cingular employee was that the phone will not ship with a disabled 3G radio.
I assume that even if the device ships with a disabled 3G radio, that information will be contained in the FCC filing, so we should know about it well in advance of the phone release.
odo
http://www.theregister.com/2007/01/12/apple_lockdown_iphone/
the phone is locked to third party development. iphone is DOA.
Wow...just wow...will you people listen to yourselves?? I get so sick and tired of the people who frequent this and other tech blogs assuming that just becuase THEY want it or need it that the rest of the country does to. BS!
Repeat after me:
I AM A POWER USER, I REPRESENT A FRACTION OF THE POPULATION OF THIS COUNTRY/THE WORLD. THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE POPULATION HAVE COMPUTING DEMANDS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT AND OFTEN MUCH LESS THAN I DO.
Do you get it yet?!?! YOU might not be the target demographic Apple is going for! *GASP*
As has been stated above a fraction of carriers have 3G in the U.S. and of those a fraction of their users actually use it! And yes international readers, before you start complaining about how not all of you live in the U.S. remember that it won't even be released overseas until late this year or even next year.
On to the apps part of it, um, do you realize what fraction of users actually care about spreadsheets or word documents on them? I realize for some of you its important, which again, is great, but for the vast VAST majority its completely utterly useless. For most cellphone users out there they care about adding two things on their cell phone:
1) Ringtones
2) Games
Given that this thing is an iPod i think it safe to say that both will be available.
Beyond that I think its utterly ridiculous to criticize a product that won't even be available for 6 months and also may not be intended to do every little teeny tiny thing that YOU as a power user might want it to. Believe it or not the tech world doesn't actually revolve around you.
this just in- apple employee shot in back while trying to escape from corporate headquarters with a briefcase full of programming hacks for the iPhone written on napkins by steve jobs when he was bored at lavish dining parties.
Textbook Mac marketing tippie toe the market first. For some reason they have been so cautious into the cellphone industry it defies logic.
We all now the iMac is so much better than the first RevA why they couldn't start sooner on the cellphone probably had to do with Apple's obsession with the iPod. Personally a bit bummed out for other reasons like there were NO new computer developments NADA. In fact that is the first time I have ever seen MacWorld NOT mention a new computer. Figures just when I'm in the market :-(
There will be a litmus test of the cell biz in June then low and behold JUST in time for Xmas '07 the mother of all cellphones will hit the shelves... JMVHO
Better be some lap top updates as well or I WILL be bummed! LOVE the new iPhone though. Rome wasn't built in a day and remember the customer is never satisfied. The Cult of the Mac is in good health it seems.
I think Jobs is looking forward to ubiquitous Wi-Fi. I'm in Canada and work on a University campus where Wi-Fi is everywhere. But on a recent trip through the West Coast of the U.S. I found free Wi-Fi networks everywhere. Legit free, not just stealing free. It won't be long before every even moderate city is a big hot spot, at which point it won't make sense to have to stuff so many competing technologies into the iPhone.
I'm sure that it would be quite cool to have 3G in the phone, but be realistic: 3G is not yet widely available in the US. The inclusion of WiFi means that high speed internet is possible on the phone in far more places than 3G would be; and the EDGE service is perfectly fine for looking up the location of the nearest Starbucks or fetching email when you are standing on the sidewalk... but how many users, even with 3G, are looking at the New York Times website standing outside the drugstore?
It's not perfect, and it is compromised in many features. But it will still sell enough to make Apple a new force in the mobile industry. And all of the turmoil and complaints that this announcement has stirred up simply serve as free market research for Apple.
Gene, 3G is actually pretty widely deployed in the US, just not with Cingular. Verizon and Sprint have a very extensive EV-DO 3G network in place right NOW. And with Rev A coming down the pike very soon, it will be that much better.
T Man, EV-DO is a completely different standard than UMTS and requires a different radio. It's also only used in the U.S., world-wide mostly GSM and UMTS / HSDPA are used. If you want to go world-wide you have to go with UMTS.
Spartacus, excellent comment - isn't it funny Engadget articles elicit responses that are far more insightful than the article they are commenting on? That's why I read comments.
There's got to be some reason that 3G was left out and clearly it's not that Apple is just plain dump (oops, we forgot!) or that 3G is more expensive. I, too, suspect business reasons as in the Cringely article - it's the only suggestion I have read that would make sense.
Consider the opposite: Apple allows both 3rd party apps and UMTS. Suddenly Skype appears on the iPhone and Cingular has to completely change its business model. While this day will come eventually, ATT certainly doesn't want to see it happen any sooner than necessary. It will be years.
Near term, the concern about ringtone downloads is much larger - it's a huge cash-cow for carriers and they need to defend it rigorously because it could so easily be taken away. Video is an even bigger one.
I fully believe that 3G is already in the iPhone. While it may cost a few bucks more in each phone, it will also cost less to make them all the same world-wide rather than support x different models. An equation that evens out very quickly.
cdma2000 and 1xEV-DO were accepted as compliant with IMT-2000 (the only definition of "3G" that exists) by the ITU. There are 80 million or more CDMA/EV-DO users in the United States. The 16% figure is conservative if anything.
Attention "it doesn't have 3G" dorks: Look at the last line in the photo above, stage-right of Jobs: It says "Wi-Fi + EDGE networking; Automatically detects and switches to Wi-Fi". Also, apparently, the preferred method of song downloads is through the PC, not via wireless. Apple's (wireless) internet connectivity strategy apparently is (wireless) Ethernet, not cellular. Why? Because cellular data is expensive. Certainly you 3G-heads on the eastern side of the Atlantic - where you have to pay for every Mbyte you download - can appreciate this.
The relevant question is not "when will it have 3G?" but "when will it have WiMAX?".
Ahhh - well here is the thing: it is NOT the geeks or 'dorks' complaining about the lack of a 'power' features - 3G is beginning to appear in CHEAP phones. i.e. what all of you fanboys are saying about the huge price of 3G makes no damn sense - this is a $600 phone with a 2 year contract!! (i.e. a $1000+ phone!). In 6 months virtually all new phones being that cost half of what the iPhone does will all be 3G capable. Not the cheap ones - but all the NEW high-end ones. So I don't buy that argument one tuny bit - in fact I am hopeful that it is capable and can be enabled with a firmware upgrade as some have menetioned. All the recent CDMA blackberries (even the older 7250) were upgradable from 1xrt to EVDO with firmware upgrades - and those 7250s things were out for a couple of years before the 3G upgrade was offered on some networks. no 3G makes no sense - so I am hoepful that they are not idiots on this one.
But here is the best bit:
"For most cellphone users out there they care about adding two things on their cell phone:
1) Ringtones
2) Games
Given that this thing is an iPod i think it safe to say that both will be available."
NEWS FLASH: games ARE apps. Thats right - there will be no games. absorb that one for a minute. Those who think that (for some reason) we want to run office frickin apps on the phone have missed the point.
Now repeat after me: games are apps and virtually (90%+) all cheap-assed phones (you know - FREE with a contract) can download and run 3rd party apps (i.e. GAMES!!!!). The $600 dollar iPhone can't.
Having been responsible for managing the development of an application and service that rolled out nation-wide on a major carrier, i can tell you that the carriers can easily limit access to network features so that 3rd party apps can't use the network - so there is no concern that people will install 3rd party apps to download iTunes over Cingulars network. Besides, all they would have to is force all the traffic of 3rd party apps through a particular APN and charge a ton of $$$ for network data usage for those apps. All the built-in stuff can have their data tracked separately through different APNs and have 'standard' data plans apply to those. In other words: allow 3rd party apps to be installed BUT make it difficult / impossible / pricey for these apps to access the network. So that dismisses that bunch of bunk.
So seriously - go ahead: explain to us all why it is again that the iPhone should not have such 'dork' features as downloading a frickin game like every 3 year-old craptacular phone?
No sir - I call shenanigans!
The whole reason I am buying this device is for the software....Mac OS X is a pleasure to use. Therfore, I will assume the iPhone's OS will also be a pleaure to use.
NEWS FLASH: games ARE apps. Thats right - there will be no games. absorb that one for a minute. Those who think that (for some reason) we want to run office frickin apps on the phone have missed the point.
Um, apparently you and the rest of the world are illiterate. Please point out to me where it said that there will be no additional apps allowed on the iPhone? Go ahead, look hard. You won't be able to find it because its just not true. There won't be OPEN development on the iPhone, but just like the iPod games currently available Jobs has allready said they will work with partners to develop apps. Games will without a doubt be one of them. You and I might not be able to code up an iPhone app, but other companies (such as i dunno, Microsofts Mac BU) will.